Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

cali92rs · 07-19-2014, 11:31 AM

Originally posted by Uluru

Just look at Sony, Oly and Fuji users, they are already caught in shopping and constant upgrade frenzy, as they are dependant on the weakest part of the mirrorless system — the EVF.

Yet more nonsense and speaking about things which you know nothing about and have no experience.
Par for the course for a post from you

Steve.Ledger · 07-19-2014, 02:23 PM

That's a rather nasty personal attack on a fellow member. Please keep things friendly and objective here.

severalsnakes · 07-19-2014, 02:51 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by pentaxian_tmb

Walked around with my new mx-1 before heading home from the office. The camera actually fits nicely in the palm of my hand. The LCD screen performs well in sunlight. JPEG engine renders colors nicely. Very "fun" to use. Still, I read the rave reviews about the great lowlight, ISO performance of this thing. But, take a look at my shot of the capital below. At ISO 540, there is TONS of purple noise in the sky. Also, the camera seems to produce a fair amount of barrel distortion (note the leaning tower dome in the bike pic.) I read about the problem with the tungsten WB, did didn't realize it would be this bad. I had the color profile set to normal and WB to tungsten and it doesn't look like the tungsten compensator has any effect.

Fair critiques! I have certainly noticed the barrel distortion at the wide end of the lens, but it does disappear with zoom, and you can engage a correction option if you're shooting JPEGs. Photoshop Elements 11, which I use for editing, has a feature to correct distortion as well. The image you posted of the dome at ISO 540 does appear to have a lot of noise in the sky! Was this shot in JPEG or RAW? I will cross-post an example image I used in another thread, with a RAW file shot at ISO 1600. I think the noise is subtle and inoffensive. This may be circumstantial (because of the subject matter: vast darkened sky versus limited shadows), or because the MX-1's JPEG engine "over processed" or something similarly undesirable.

No noise reduction was done to this image, just RGB levels.

I'll take the MX-1 out tonight and play around with different ISO settings. Any reason is a good reason to "play pictures".

pentaxian_tmb · 07-19-2014, 06:15 PM

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

Last edited by pentaxian_tmb; 07-19-2014 at 08:05 PM.

pentaxian_tmb · 07-19-2014, 08:07 PM

seriously, I am not trying to be a PITA. I was very excited to get this camera and even paid for expedited shipping. Is this amount of color noise normal for this camera?

severalsnakes · 07-19-2014, 08:23 PM

Originally posted by pentaxian_tmb

seriously, I am not trying to be a PITA. I was very excited to get this camera and even paid for expedited shipping. Is this amount of color noise normal for this camera?

Hmm. It looks pretty damn noisy. I tried to recreate your EXIF data... (I forgot I had my JPEG settings set to high contrast and increased sharpness.)

1/25s, f/2.5, ISO 1600. Like I said, my JPEG had high contrast and sharpness, plus I have shadow and highlight compensation on, and auto ND filter (not that it would have engaged here) and barrel distortion correction... I think that's all the settings that can be considered...

Here's a JPEG SOOC.

And here's the RAW, no adjustments, except saved as JPEG.

It's not very scientific, but it's a place to start dissecting things?

---------- Post added 07-19-14 at 10:28 PM ----------

Pentaxian_TMB. What is your JPEG quality set at? (I assume you're shooting JPEG?) Are you uploading into a program on your computer that is doing automatic correction?

EDIT:

Here are a couple more:

SOOC JPEG, Turned off increased contrast and sharpness (this is in the "Vibrant" color setting, as was the previous test.)

SOOC RAW, saved as JPEG:

pentaxian_tmb · 07-19-2014, 09:09 PM

Originally posted by severalsnakes

Hmm. It looks pretty damn noisy. I tried to recreate your EXIF data... (I forgot I had my JPEG settings set to high contrast and increased sharpness.)

1/25s, f/2.5, ISO 1600. Like I said, my JPEG had high contrast and sharpness, plus I have shadow and highlight compensation on, and auto ND filter (not that it would have engaged here) and barrel distortion correction... I think that's all the settings that can be considered...

Here's a JPEG SOOC.

And here's the RAW, no adjustments, except saved as JPEG.

It's not very scientific, but it's a place to start dissecting things?

---------- Post added 07-19-14 at 10:28 PM ----------

Pentaxian_TMB. What is your JPEG quality set at? (I assume you're shooting JPEG?) Are you uploading into a program on your computer that is doing automatic correction?

EDIT:

Here are a couple more:

SOOC JPEG, Turned off increased contrast and sharpness (this is in the "Vibrant" color setting, as was the previous test.)

SOOC RAW, saved as JPEG:

All shots were Jpeg fine except the dehumidifier, which was raw and processed to Jpeg in pse 9

Last edited by pentaxian_tmb; 07-21-2014 at 12:26 PM.

severalsnakes · 07-20-2014, 12:02 PM

I really don't know, but I feel like yours do look noisier than mine (even though yours are ISO 1000 and mine are 1600?). Do you agree? I don't know what the difference could be. Any other input from other forum members?

Mooey · 07-20-2014, 12:06 PM

I shoot in RAW and don't have that problem, there looks like alot of in camera processing that's ruining the pictures.

pentaxian_tmb · 07-20-2014, 03:54 PM

Has to be a defect. This was shot in raw at ISO 200, no PP. Going to exchange. I really do like the way the camera feels in hand and the tilting LCD. But that is just not acceptable

Mooey · 07-21-2014, 05:17 AM

Yea, looks like a fault with the camera

pentaxian_tmb · 07-21-2014, 10:43 AM

Originally posted by Mooey

Yea, looks like a fault with the camera

Ok. good. I am not crazy. Returned and re-ordered. This is the 2nd defective camera I have ordered through amazon in the last 2 years. Re-ordered through buy-dig.

tootal2 · 07-21-2014, 07:04 PM

It looks kind of strange but I like it.
This eye ball looks good in hdr.

eye ball without hdr

robtcorl · 07-22-2014, 04:55 AM

Originally posted by tootal2

It looks kind of strange but I like it.
This eye ball looks good in hdr.

I like the HDR version too.
Guess I need to go to Laumeier Park and "see" this in person, it's been years since I was there.

tootal2 · 07-22-2014, 08:23 AM

they added some new stuff like a airplane and a eyeball, but they got rid of the iron people and the row of balls

Originally posted by robtcorl

I like the HDR version too.
Guess I need to go to Laumeier Park and "see" this in person, it's been years since I was there.

07-19-2014, 08:23 PM	#66
severalsnakes Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Kansas City, KS Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,612	Originally posted by pentaxian_tmb seriously, I am not trying to be a PITA. I was very excited to get this camera and even paid for expedited shipping. Is this amount of color noise normal for this camera? Hmm. It looks pretty damn noisy. I tried to recreate your EXIF data... (I forgot I had my JPEG settings set to high contrast and increased sharpness.) 1/25s, f/2.5, ISO 1600. Like I said, my JPEG had high contrast and sharpness, plus I have shadow and highlight compensation on, and auto ND filter (not that it would have engaged here) and barrel distortion correction... I think that's all the settings that can be considered... Here's a JPEG SOOC. And here's the RAW, no adjustments, except saved as JPEG. It's not very scientific, but it's a place to start dissecting things? ---------- Post added 07-19-14 at 10:28 PM ---------- Pentaxian_TMB. What is your JPEG quality set at? (I assume you're shooting JPEG?) Are you uploading into a program on your computer that is doing automatic correction? EDIT: Here are a couple more: SOOC JPEG, Turned off increased contrast and sharpness (this is in the "Vibrant" color setting, as was the previous test.) SOOC RAW, saved as JPEG: Last edited by severalsnakes; 07-19-2014 at 08:36 PM.

07-20-2014, 12:06 PM	#69
Mooey Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Photos: Albums Posts: 92	I shoot in RAW and don't have that problem, there looks like alot of in camera processing that's ruining the pictures. Last edited by Mooey; 07-20-2014 at 11:05 PM.

07-21-2014, 07:04 PM	#73
tootal2 Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: saint louis mo Posts: 70	I like hdr on the mx-1 It looks kind of strange but I like it. This eye ball looks good in hdr. eye ball without hdr

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax MX-1 Raw Samples	Mooey	Pentax Compact Cameras	12	11-26-2014 08:42 PM
Pentax Q10 with 5-15mm Lens or Pentax MX-1	yucatanPentax	Pentax Price Watch	5	01-02-2014 02:00 PM
PENTAX MX-1 HIGH-END DIGITAL COMPACT WINS PRESTIGIOUS 2013 DESIGN AWARD MX-1 Receives	Adam	Homepage & Official Pentax News	6	03-21-2013 09:58 PM
Pentax MX-1 Full Specifications	Adam	Pentax Compact Cameras	48	01-14-2013 08:18 AM

07-19-2014, 11:31 AM	#61
cali92rs Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 3,354	Originally posted by Uluru Just look at Sony, Oly and Fuji users, they are already caught in shopping and constant upgrade frenzy, as they are dependant on the weakest part of the mirrorless system — the EVF. Yet more nonsense and speaking about things which you know nothing about and have no experience. Par for the course for a post from you

07-19-2014, 02:23 PM	#62
Steve.Ledger Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Far North Qld Posts: 3,301	That's a rather nasty personal attack on a fellow member. Please keep things friendly and objective here.

07-19-2014, 02:51 PM - 1 Like	#63
severalsnakes Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Kansas City, KS Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,612	Originally posted by pentaxian_tmb Walked around with my new mx-1 before heading home from the office. The camera actually fits nicely in the palm of my hand. The LCD screen performs well in sunlight. JPEG engine renders colors nicely. Very "fun" to use. Still, I read the rave reviews about the great lowlight, ISO performance of this thing. But, take a look at my shot of the capital below. At ISO 540, there is TONS of purple noise in the sky. Also, the camera seems to produce a fair amount of barrel distortion (note the leaning tower dome in the bike pic.) I read about the problem with the tungsten WB, did didn't realize it would be this bad. I had the color profile set to normal and WB to tungsten and it doesn't look like the tungsten compensator has any effect. Fair critiques! I have certainly noticed the barrel distortion at the wide end of the lens, but it does disappear with zoom, and you can engage a correction option if you're shooting JPEGs. Photoshop Elements 11, which I use for editing, has a feature to correct distortion as well. The image you posted of the dome at ISO 540 does appear to have a lot of noise in the sky! Was this shot in JPEG or RAW? I will cross-post an example image I used in another thread, with a RAW file shot at ISO 1600. I think the noise is subtle and inoffensive. This may be circumstantial (because of the subject matter: vast darkened sky versus limited shadows), or because the MX-1's JPEG engine "over processed" or something similarly undesirable. No noise reduction was done to this image, just RGB levels. I'll take the MX-1 out tonight and play around with different ISO settings. Any reason is a good reason to "play pictures".

07-19-2014, 08:07 PM	#65
pentaxian_tmb Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Madison, Wisconsin Posts: 436	seriously, I am not trying to be a PITA. I was very excited to get this camera and even paid for expedited shipping. Is this amount of color noise normal for this camera?

07-19-2014, 09:09 PM	#67
pentaxian_tmb Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Madison, Wisconsin Posts: 436	Originally posted by severalsnakes Hmm. It looks pretty damn noisy. I tried to recreate your EXIF data... (I forgot I had my JPEG settings set to high contrast and increased sharpness.) 1/25s, f/2.5, ISO 1600. Like I said, my JPEG had high contrast and sharpness, plus I have shadow and highlight compensation on, and auto ND filter (not that it would have engaged here) and barrel distortion correction... I think that's all the settings that can be considered... Here's a JPEG SOOC. And here's the RAW, no adjustments, except saved as JPEG. It's not very scientific, but it's a place to start dissecting things? ---------- Post added 07-19-14 at 10:28 PM ---------- Pentaxian_TMB. What is your JPEG quality set at? (I assume you're shooting JPEG?) Are you uploading into a program on your computer that is doing automatic correction? EDIT: Here are a couple more: SOOC JPEG, Turned off increased contrast and sharpness (this is in the "Vibrant" color setting, as was the previous test.) SOOC RAW, saved as JPEG: All shots were Jpeg fine except the dehumidifier, which was raw and processed to Jpeg in pse 9 Last edited by pentaxian_tmb; 07-21-2014 at 12:26 PM.

07-20-2014, 12:02 PM	#68
severalsnakes Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Kansas City, KS Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,612	I really don't know, but I feel like yours do look noisier than mine (even though yours are ISO 1000 and mine are 1600?). Do you agree? I don't know what the difference could be. Any other input from other forum members?

07-21-2014, 05:17 AM	#71
Mooey Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Photos: Albums Posts: 92	Yea, looks like a fault with the camera

07-21-2014, 10:43 AM	#72
pentaxian_tmb Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Madison, Wisconsin Posts: 436	Originally posted by Mooey Yea, looks like a fault with the camera Ok. good. I am not crazy. Returned and re-ordered. This is the 2nd defective camera I have ordered through amazon in the last 2 years. Re-ordered through buy-dig.

07-22-2014, 04:55 AM	#74
robtcorl Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: St Louis, MO Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,606	Originally posted by tootal2 It looks kind of strange but I like it. This eye ball looks good in hdr. I like the HDR version too. Guess I need to go to Laumeier Park and "see" this in person, it's been years since I was there.

07-22-2014, 08:23 AM	#75
tootal2 Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: saint louis mo Posts: 70	they added some new stuff like a airplane and a eyeball, but they got rid of the iron people and the row of balls Originally posted by robtcorl I like the HDR version too. Guess I need to go to Laumeier Park and "see" this in person, it's been years since I was there.

Pentax MX-1

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!